An International Court of Civil Justice would give victims of multinationals a day in court while offering corporate defendants a cheaper, fairer litigation alternative.

A trenchant critique of developments in civil justice that questions modern orthodoxy and points to a downgrading of civil justice.

America is a nation founded on justice and the rule of law. But our laws are too complex, and legal advice too expensive, for poor and even middle-class Americans to get help and vindicate their rights. Criminal defendants facing jail time may receive an appointed lawyer who is juggling hundreds of cases and immediately urges them to plead guilty. Civil litigants are even worse off; usually, they get no help at all navigating the maze of technical procedures and rules. The same is true of those seeking legal advice, like planning a will or negotiating an employment contract. Rebooting Justice presents a novel response to longstanding problems. The answer is to use technology and procedural innovation to simplify and change the process itself. In the civil and criminal courts where ordinary Americans appear the most, we should streamline complex procedures and assume that parties will not have a lawyer, rather than the other way around. We need a cheaper, simpler, faster justice system to control costs. We cannot untie the Gordian knot by adding more strands of rope; we need to cut it, to simplify it.

A sense of crisis in the administration of civil justice is present in many countries. Delays and high costs render access to the civil courts either useless or prohibitively expensive or both. The crisis takes different forms. In some jurisdictions the problems lie in high and unpredictable costs but in others there are overcrowded courts and exorbitant delays. Those interested in civil justice will be familiar with their own system but they will seldom have knowledge of other systems and these essays, written by leading experts in the field, survey different systems of civil justice from other jurisdictions. An understanding of other systems will enrich the reform discussions in which each country by drawing attention to common problems, to their roots, to the solutions tried and, above all, to the consequences (for better or for worse) of reform. Civil Justice in Crisis shows that we can learn from others' success but that we may find their failures even more instructive.

"Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System."

"This book delves into issued of 'Civil justice' which refers to that part of a legal system that is concerned with the legal relations between people (including 'legal persons') as distinct from 'criminal justice' i.e. that part of the legal system concerned with actions by the state against people and looks at contracts, personal injury, property and the breakdown of family relations as familiar examples of civil disputes"--

This book is a collection of papers that address a fundamental question: What is the role of civil justice and civil procedure in the various national traditions in the contemporary world? The book presents striking differences among a range of countries and legal traditions, but also points to common trends and open issues. It brings together prominent experts, professionals and scholars from both civil and common law jurisdictions. It represents all main legal traditions ranging from Europe (Germanic and Romanic countries, Scandinavia, ex-Socialist countries) and Russia to the Americas (North and South) and China (Mainland and Hong Kong). While addressing the main issue – the goals of civil justice – the book discusses the most topical concerns regarding the functioning and efficiency of national systems of civil justice. These include concerns such as finding the appropriate balance between accurate fact-finding and the right to a fair trial within a reasonable time, the processing of hard cases and the function of civil justice as a specific public service. In the mosaic of contrasts and oppositions special place is devoted to the continuing battle between the individualistic/liberal approach and the collectivist/paternalistic approach – the battle in which, seemingly, paternalistic tendencies regain momentum in a number of contemporary justice systems.